HIV Paternity Payments Urged for 'Deadbeat' Infectors ("Gay" Indemnification Barf Alert)

CNSNews.com) - A nationally syndicated columnist who is openly homosexual is offering what he calls "a truly radical step" to curb unsafe sex -- forcing HIV-positive homosexual men who knowingly or negligently spread the virus to be financially accountable to their affected sexual partners.

The idea is being panned by medical experts who work extensively with the homosexual community, but it has drawn praise from a spokesman for a leading conservative group in Washington, D.C., who not only called the establishment of HIV paternity a "useful" idea, but said there should be more criminal prosecution for the reckless spread of HIV.

Dan Savage, whose column, "Savage Love," appears in publications including The Village Voice, first proposed the idea in his February 22 column. Savage compared his suggestion about HIV (human immunodeficiency virus) financial obligations to a heterosexual man being held responsible for paternity. While paternity forces child support payments, Savage's proposal would force homosexual spreaders of the HIV virus to be partly responsible for "drug support payments."

"[O]ne surefire way to curb unsafe sex would be to put the cost of AIDS meds (medications) into the equation," Savage wrote. "If the state can go after deadbeat dads and make them pay child support, why can't it go after deadbeat infectors and make them pay drug support?"

Savage has authored several books including, "The Kid: What Happened After My Boyfriend and I Decided to Go Get Pregnant: An Adoption Story," a book detailing how he and his homosexual partner adopted a child.

Savage explained how his HIV paternity proposal would work. "Infect someone with HIV out of malice or negligence and the state will come after you ...

You can't infect someone with HIV. Because there is no such thing as HIV.

No laboratory has ever obtained an isolate of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), despite countless attempts. Neither Montaigner nor Gallo, the "discoverers of HIV" were able to isolate HIV. The multi-billion dollar AIDS industry has failed to isolate HIV after decades of extremely well-funded research - indeed it has failed even to produce a candidate virus particle and then to show that that particle is able to replicate in a virus-like manner. This is a basic first step of clinical epidemiology and is conspicuous by its absence. It is not known that the HIV virus even exists, despite over twenty years of research. After twenty years we can surely hazard a guess that no virus is there to be found.

Instead of isolating the virus, laboratories, clinics and medical corporations have come to accept certain indirect signs, or markers, such as antibody reactions, proteins, genetic fragments, "virus-like" particles, enzymes - that could indeed suggest the prescence of a virus but could as easily point to other things - as proving the presence and existence of this virion, HIV.

This lowering of the bar for proof-of-virus has not only led to a clinical disaster in AIDs science (50,000 US citizens killed by AZT), it has led to many new fake-viruses (Hep-C for instance) which also cannot be isolated. And like HIV, the new no-proof-needed viruses also exhibit a distinctly non-viral epidemiology. They only cause symptoms within groups with suspiciously toxic behaviour (heavy drinking, drug use, malnutrition, heavy sugar ingestion), just as HIV only killed people who were overdosing on nitrate poppers, before it started killing only people who were on lethal doses of AZT

The idea of forcing people to pay for their self-inflicted illnesses is an excellent one. Those AIDs "victims" who are actually suffering from dissipate life styles - yeah, throw the book at them. But don't force them to buy so-called anti-virals - those poisonous HAART drugs are the new cause of AIDs

Excellent resources can be found from links on this page. Alternatively there are superbly readable papers dating back twenty years on various parts of this site though it doesn't get updated so much these days. The siteholder got tired I think. There are also sites in french, spanish which URLs I can parse if required.

Finally there are these people who are the focus of current movement in HIV theory. Their leader (biophysicist Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos) is an unstoppable killing machine. Her contributions to the BMJ online debate will bear me out.

The sure-fire way for this idea to catch on is for the money to go to States, ostensibly to pay for the burden States bear for treating people with AIDS. (Like the big tobacco lawsuit ). The fact that the State may not have to actually spend much for the specific people infected makes no difference (private insurance, etc.). It would be nothing more than legal extortion to raise revenue for States, and that is why it could catch on.

States will do anything to raise revenues now. Things they would never allow private citizens to do.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.